(b) interference with the performance of official duties;

C. Violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act

1. Examining the reasoning of the original judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below as to the grounds for appeal by Defendant 1, it is justifiable to acknowledge the changed facts of the public prosecution of this case (excluding the part not guilty of the court below) on the grounds as stated in the judgment of the court below as guilty on the grounds as stated in the judgment of the court below. There is no error by misapprehending the legal principles on the report of a demonstration, the determination on the identity of a demonstration and an assembly, the requirements for establishing a crime of interference with general traffic, or the relation with a person, etc., by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, such as the argument of the grounds for appeal.

2. As to the grounds of appeal by the public prosecutor

Examining the reasoning of the original judgment in light of the record, it is reasonable to reverse the judgment of the first instance that found him/her guilty and rendered a verdict of not guilty on June 21, 2008, on the ground that the changed indictment of this case was based on the same reasons as the judgment of the court below, on the ground that there was no proof of crime, among the facts of the changed indictment of this case, the fact that the general traffic obstruction was committed on June 21, 2008. There is no error in the judgment of the court of first instance, such as by violating the logic and experience legal rules as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Chang-suk

Chief Justice Lee Ki-taik

Justices Kim Jae-hyung